Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How should combat maneuvers be handled in Next?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Stormonu" data-source="post: 5932028" data-attributes="member: 52734"><p>I think there should be a basic level of proficiency for anyone to try maneuvers like bull rush, tackle, trip, disarm, sunder, sap, grapple and all of that. At the most basic level, I think I'd like to see it be an attack at no penalty, but you only perform the maneuver, not damage. An "either-or" basic solution - you can add on riders as the PCs get more experienced.</p><p></p><p>I wouldn't mind classes have "preferred" special maneuvers that they can get easier access to or can perform easier. For example, a monk having an easier time with trips or grapples, rogues getting a hamstring or sap maneuver and fighters being able to run with bull rush, disarms and sunders easier than others.</p><p></p><p>Beyond that, a few options to allow certain characters to "get fancy" with certain attacks. I think at best PCs should be able to bring these types of attacks up to par but I'm not sure I want them to be able to bring them up to a skill level where, say, with <em>every</em> attack the fighter is tripping his foe AND dealing full damage as well.</p><p></p><p>Perhaps a "degrees of success" thing - hit AC to AC +4, perform manuever only. Hit AC +5 to AC +9, perform manuever and deal 1/2 damage. Hit AC +10 or more, perform manuever and deal full damage. (If AC numbers are flattened, perhaps instead tie it to "Hit Dice", hit points or some other factor) This would allow an attacker to at least try maneuvers against competent opponents, and against inferior foes really put the sting on.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Stormonu, post: 5932028, member: 52734"] I think there should be a basic level of proficiency for anyone to try maneuvers like bull rush, tackle, trip, disarm, sunder, sap, grapple and all of that. At the most basic level, I think I'd like to see it be an attack at no penalty, but you only perform the maneuver, not damage. An "either-or" basic solution - you can add on riders as the PCs get more experienced. I wouldn't mind classes have "preferred" special maneuvers that they can get easier access to or can perform easier. For example, a monk having an easier time with trips or grapples, rogues getting a hamstring or sap maneuver and fighters being able to run with bull rush, disarms and sunders easier than others. Beyond that, a few options to allow certain characters to "get fancy" with certain attacks. I think at best PCs should be able to bring these types of attacks up to par but I'm not sure I want them to be able to bring them up to a skill level where, say, with [I]every[/I] attack the fighter is tripping his foe AND dealing full damage as well. Perhaps a "degrees of success" thing - hit AC to AC +4, perform manuever only. Hit AC +5 to AC +9, perform manuever and deal 1/2 damage. Hit AC +10 or more, perform manuever and deal full damage. (If AC numbers are flattened, perhaps instead tie it to "Hit Dice", hit points or some other factor) This would allow an attacker to at least try maneuvers against competent opponents, and against inferior foes really put the sting on. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How should combat maneuvers be handled in Next?
Top